Many MPA programs are struggling to identify ways to evaluate their outcomes. This paper describes the development and implementation of a method for assessing student learning outcomes in the MPA program at the University of Colorado Denver. The multi-method approach makes use of rubrics to examine whether students demonstrate the desired knowledge and skill, and student surveys to describe students’ perceptions of their abilities in the same areas. Means for gaining faculty commitment to the process and making use of the information for program improvement are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AlexanderF. King. (2000). The changing face of accountability: Monitoring and assessing institutional performance in higher education. The Journal of Higher Education, 71(4), 411–430.
2.
AristeguetaMariaGomesKimberly M. B.. (2006). Assessing performance in naspaa graduate programs. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 12(1), 1–18.
3.
BriggsC. L.StarkJ. S.Rowland-PoplawksiJean. (2003). How do we know a “continuous planning” academic program when we see one?The Journal of Higher Education, 74(4), 361–385.
4.
DurantRobert F. (2002). Toward becoming a learning organization: outcomes assessment, naspaa accreditation, and mission-based capstone courses. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 8(3), 193–208.
5.
FitzpatrickJody L.SandersJames R.WorthenBlaine R.. (2004). Program Evaluation: Alternative Approaches and Practical Guidelines, 3rd Edition. New York: Allyn and Bacon.
6.
JenningsEdward T. (1989). Accountability, program quality, outcome assessment, and graduate education for public affairs and administration. Public Administration Review, 438–446.
7.
MertlerCraig A. (2001). Designing scoring rubrics for your classroom. Journal of Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation [On-line], 7(25). Available at http://pareonline.net/Home.htm. Accessed Nov. 17, 2007.
8.
MoskalBarbara M. (2000). Scoring rubrics: what, when, and how?Journal of Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation [On-line], 7(25). Available at http://pareonline.net/Home.htm. Accessed Nov. 17, 2007.
9.
NASPAA (National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration). (2000). General Information and Standards for Professional Masters Degree Programs, [On-line]. Available at http://www.naspaa.org/accreditation/seeking/reference/standards.asp. Accessed Nov. 17, 2007.
10.
PeatBarbara. (2006). integrating writing and research skills: development and testing of a rubric to measure student outcomes. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 12(3), 295–311.
11.
PosnerPaul L.FantoneDenise M.. (2007). Assessing federal program performance: observations on the u.s. office of management and budget’s program assessment rating tool and its use in the budget process. Public Performance and Management Review, 30(3), 351–369.
12.
PrattClaraMcGuiganWilliam M.KatzevAphra R.. (2000). Measuring program outcomes: using retrospective pretest methodology. American Journal of Evaluation, 21(3), 341–349.
13.
RobertsGary E. (2001). Using stakeholder surveys in mpa program performance measurement. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 7(1), 19–30.
14.
TashakkoriAbbasTeddlieCharles B., eds. (2003). Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social & Behavioral Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
15.
U. S. General Accounting Office. (1997). The government performance and results act. (GAO/GGD-97-109.)Washington, D.C.: U. S. Government Printing Office.
16.
U. S. General Accounting Office. (2004). Performance Budgeting: Observations on the Use of OMB’s Program Assessment Rating Tool for the Fiscal 2004 Budget. (GAO-04-174). Washington, D.C.: U. S. Government Printing Office.
17.
WilliamsDavid G. (2002). Seeking the holy grail: Assessing outcomes of MPA programs. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 8(1), 45–56.
18.
WolfKennethStevensEllen. (2007). The Role of Rubrics in Advancing and Assessing Student Learning. The Journal of Effective Teaching [On-line], 7(1), 3–14. Available at http://www.uncw.edu/cte/et/articles/Vol7_1/index.htm. Accessed Nov. 17, 2007.
19.
YinRobert K. (2003). Case Study Research: Design and Methods, (3rd ed.), Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
